Mr. Zipper

Spot on. It's NOT about soft grading. The real issues revolve around transparency, ethics, insider manipulation (high numbers of undisclosed trimmed books from a certain Oregon seller), and incompentance that is so blatant, one would have to question if it is truly an honest mistake or fraud (e.g., multiple Lee, Ditko and Kirby signed books.)

It's not the plastic, the cost is all tied up in "the process" of moving the comic from receipt of the submission to the final shipping out and all the QA and security steps in-between. No way that's going to happen for $5 a book. Bear in mind, whether the book is being graded or not, they still need to follow every step to ensure the right book gets back to the right submitter in the condition it was received.

From what I've heard from reliable sources, it was due to the others company's policy on noting conservation vs. restoration. For the record, I'm not a fan of Richie Muchin. He burned me on a Sgt. Fury 1 and Hulk 6 with undisclosed restoration -- NOT conservation.

Favoritism is fine. But equating the distinguished competition to an outfit with a long history of questionable behavior and serious ethics issues is a bit much.

It's pretty consistent with one I got a few years ago. I wasn't totally thrilled, but it is what it is... I've seen worse.

One may reasonably disagree with their standards, but the distinguished competition is staffed by reputable, well-known people who provide a credible service. It's wrong to equate them with a company of unknowns with zero transparency and a long and checkered history.

Right. Home Depot doesn't want any positive PR for Lowes. But they probably don't care about competition from Handyman Harry who tools around town in his rusted out 92 pickup... cigarette pack rolled up in his short sleeve and mullet blowing in the wind.

For the past six years I have been professionally authenticating space memorabilia for top auction houses, dealers and collectors. I've seen the same phenomena over and over again, and it applies to all areas of collecting. Obviously these do not apply to ALL people, but they apply to many. Collecting is emotional, and as such, collectors often do not apply logic or common-sense thinking. They WANT to believe the "stories" and the urge for denial is stronger than the urge to dig out uncomfortable truths. Many people naturally avoid conflict and tune out what they perceive as "negative" information. Often the whistleblower is more demonized than the culprit. Many collectors and dealers don't necessarily care about authenticity or accuracy -- all that matters is "will the Company X cert it?" Many people generally have low and shallow attention spans and don't have the tools to "connect the dots" Many people do not have the judgement to discern between credible information and intentional disinformation/smear sites Otherwise honest people will often defend the bad guy as a "nice guy," etc. Admitting you have been fooled by a con man is a failing in judgement that victims tend to avoid. All these factors together make a perform storm for fakes, phonies and frauds to continue to prosper.

I did not see that, but it tells me all I need to know. In the autograph authentication business, the Lee signature is what would be referred to as a "malformed, drawn and stiff cookie-cutter fake." That along with the impossibility of multiple signatures from the J.D. Salinger of comics... ZERO chance they are authentic and any credible authenticator would realize this. This goes way beyond an honest "missed call" in my opinion. Sad that collectors would support this business because they are inexpensive, and even worse that legit auction venues would feature their slabs. The autograph hobby is littered with phony authenticators who rubber stamp fakes -- credible auction houses do not accept their certificates.

Understood, but the potential flaw in that line of reasoning is that it's easy to hide "problems" in a PGX slab and the fact that it is slabbed makes it less likely to be cracked and issues later discovered. [At least a few years ago] PGX was where less than credible sellers sent their books hoping they would slide by... so, there may be a greater chance that a PGX book has problems than raw. Raw books can be a minefield, but at least you can check them out easily -- much harder to hide issues. The net result is that raw books may be safer.

I haven't been active in the hobby so much over the past few years, but was pretty immersed day-to-day in the 90s through 2012 or so. I received an email from ComicConnect today and was shocked to see in the auction highlights a number of high-grade, high value books in PGX slabs. It wasn't that long ago that they were not considered reputable by serious collectors and there were significant and valid concerns regarding insider grading and very "loose" restoration checking, including rampant trimmed books. In fact, I was a victim of a trimmed JIM 89 that was sold to me in a PGX unrestored slab. (It was also significantly overgraded and sold to me by a Eugene, Oregon seller who was later revealed to be a PGX "insider" who had the "keys" to the slabbing machine.) Are these guys considered legit now? Or have they clung on long enough to outlast the core group of people who exposed and recall their questionable practices?

I'm more of a buy high, sell low kind of guy. The kind of dope who trades 9.6 Batman Adventures 12 for a common silver age Avengers because I was sure the Batman had topped out at $50.

Thank you, Joseph.

I suppose there are some who will hold 'till the bitter end, but I think most people get to a certain point and it's about not wanting all the "stuff" around the house and dealing with the requisite care. That time typically comes well before they are in very old age. I'm in my late 40s, and believe me, I'm already thinking, "Do I want to be dealing with all these long boxes in 10 or 15 years?" Five - ten years ago, those kind of thoughts didn't even cross my mind.

This. I've seen many of the same wildly overpriced books "for sale" in my daily searches literally for years. The ebay free listing nonsense is the cause of this.

The blue chip cards -- Mantle, Mays, Koufax, HOF rookies -- are higher than ever. Everything else is commons. 70s and after.... forget about it unless it's a key. That said, there seems to be some element of completism left in card collecting... that is, many collectors still try to collect the set for that year.

I'm on a tear today. About five year's worth of posts. Good to see you!

I disagree. Kids today have no connection to the paper booklets of the 60s and I just can't envision the desire spontaneously manifesting when they hit 30. How many of us loved James Bond movies in the 70s and 80s? Probably most of us. And how many suddenly had the desire to collect Ian Fleming's first edition hardbacks from the 50s because we loved the movies so much?

Just got paroled.

So true. The days of the "completist" collector are gone. That is how boomers and Gen X started collecting. There used to be great accomplishment in building a solid run of a popular title. That has been replaced by a focus on classic covers and uber high grade slabs. I would argue that we are well into the sell off of non-key SA books.

There was/is an undisclosed amateur restoration hack named "Samco" on eBay. He used "Wow" in his auction titles. The seller of the book in question uses "Wow" in his titles and has the same putrid looking work. Same guy? Avoid in any case.

Given the brittleness described by the OP and decent sized tears on the back cover, I think some of the aforementioned grades are a bit high. I'm thinking 3.5/4.0.

I don't think anyone was claiming that. That said, 25 years ago the grading standards are not what they are today. Given the minute nuances between grades these days plus there are more age 40+ collectors, the OP makes a fair point in my view. I'm not sure it's a major factor, but likely comes into play at times.

There is no doubt that once you need reading glasses, it's easier to miss small flaws... especially in low light. And quite frankly, there are a lot of people who are not very observant. They simply do not "see" fine detail and it has nothing to do with their vision declining.